Some thought that the Harvard scientist, George Church, was getting ready to put out an ad seeking volunteer surrogate moms to bear a 35,000-year-old, long-extinct Neanderthal baby. Church had to walk his comments back and note that he was just speculating, not incubating.

St_Francis_P:Some thought that the Harvard scientist, George Church, was getting ready to put out an ad seeking volunteer surrogate moms to bear a 35,000-year-old, long-extinct Neanderthal baby. Church had to walk his comments back and note that he was just speculating, not incubating.

Well of course the Church is going to be against it, they won't even admit the earth is over 6,000 years old much less 35.

Oh, look. The E.coli thing again. Ha ha ha, let's point and laugh at the silly conservative politician because he asked if some scientist's Frankenstonian experiments in evolving a race of super E.coli hadn't caused unexpected mutations. Ha ha ha, so funny.

Here's the thing, evolutionistas. Either you accept evolution, or you don't, mmmkay? If you accept evolution, then you accept that all cells are constantly in a state of flux, as it were, evolving into some future evolution along the evolutionary ladder. Or slope, as it were. Very slippery slope. After all, it's a popular notion that "humans evolved from apes." But from where did those apes evolve, hm? Don't know? Look to your own theories! Remember, Adam and Eve never existed. All life started as single cell micro-organisms swimming about in the oceans. And somehow *those* evolved into people, right? Neanderthals, too.

And so why *couldn't* an E.coli virus evolve into a human? Who's to say that, a million bajillion years from now or however long you want to pretend the earth is old, E.coli doesn't itself evolve into a person? Particularly if that E.coli had at some point in its generational evolution infected a human -- because then there would be humanistic DNA in its DNA, which could cause mutations that would bring more human genes to the forefront. From the E.coli would begin to emerge some new form of human, an E.human, and like modern humans did with the Neanderthals, perhaps these new E.humans will push "regular" humans into obsolescence and oblivion. And perhaps it would only be by pairing our current human DNA with Neanderthal DNA -- by merging our strength with the strength of our ancestors -- that we might ourselves evolve a race of Neandohumans who could stand up to the E.humans and preserve our race.

Pocket Ninja:Oh, look. The E.coli thing again. Ha ha ha, let's point and laugh at the silly conservative politician because he asked if some scientist's Frankenstonian experiments in evolving a race of super E.coli hadn't caused unexpected mutations. Ha ha ha, so funny.

Here's the thing, evolutionistas. Either you accept evolution, or you don't, mmmkay? If you accept evolution, then you accept that all cells are constantly in a state of flux, as it were, evolving into some future evolution along the evolutionary ladder. Or slope, as it were. Very slippery slope. After all, it's a popular notion that "humans evolved from apes." But from where did those apes evolve, hm? Don't know? Look to your own theories! Remember, Adam and Eve never existed. All life started as single cell micro-organisms swimming about in the oceans. And somehow *those* evolved into people, right? Neanderthals, too.

And so why *couldn't* an E.coli virus evolve into a human? Who's to say that, a million bajillion years from now or however long you want to pretend the earth is old, E.coli doesn't itself evolve into a person? Particularly if that E.coli had at some point in its generational evolution infected a human -- because then there would be humanistic DNA in its DNA, which could cause mutations that would bring more human genes to the forefront. From the E.coli would begin to emerge some new form of human, an E.human, and like modern humans did with the Neanderthals, perhaps these new E.humans will push "regular" humans into obsolescence and oblivion. And perhaps it would only be by pairing our current human DNA with Neanderthal DNA -- by merging our strength with the strength of our ancestors -- that we might ourselves evolve a race of Neandohumans who could stand up to the E.humans and preserve our race.

Pocket Ninja:Oh, look. The E.coli thing again. Ha ha ha, let's point and laugh at the silly conservative politician because he asked if some scientist's Frankenstonian experiments in evolving a race of super E.coli hadn't caused unexpected mutations. Ha ha ha, so funny.

Here's the thing, evolutionistas. Either you accept evolution, or you don't, mmmkay? If you accept evolution, then you accept that all cells are constantly in a state of flux, as it were, evolving into some future evolution along the evolutionary ladder. Or slope, as it were. Very slippery slope. After all, it's a popular notion that "humans evolved from apes." But from where did those apes evolve, hm? Don't know? Look to your own theories! Remember, Adam and Eve never existed. All life started as single cell micro-organisms swimming about in the oceans. And somehow *those* evolved into people, right? Neanderthals, too.

And so why *couldn't* an E.coli virus evolve into a human? Who's to say that, a million bajillion years from now or however long you want to pretend the earth is old, E.coli doesn't itself evolve into a person? Particularly if that E.coli had at some point in its generational evolution infected a human -- because then there would be humanistic DNA in its DNA, which could cause mutations that would bring more human genes to the forefront. From the E.coli would begin to emerge some new form of human, an E.human, and like modern humans did with the Neanderthals, perhaps these new E.humans will push "regular" humans into obsolescence and oblivion. And perhaps it would only be by pairing our current human DNA with Neanderthal DNA -- by merging our strength with the strength of our ancestors -- that we might ourselves evolve a race of Neandohumans who could stand up to the E.humans and preserve our race.

Still laughing, subby? I'm sure as hell not.

I don't think you get how viruses work. Nice science fiction novel concept though

Pocket Ninja:Oh, look. The E.coli thing again. Ha ha ha, let's point and laugh at the silly conservative politician because he asked if some scientist's Frankenstonian experiments in evolving a race of super E.coli hadn't caused unexpected mutations. Ha ha ha, so funny.

Here's the thing, evolutionistas. Either you accept evolution, or you don't, mmmkay? If you accept evolution, then you accept that all cells are constantly in a state of flux, as it were, evolving into some future evolution along the evolutionary ladder. Or slope, as it were. Very slippery slope. After all, it's a popular notion that "humans evolved from apes." But from where did those apes evolve, hm? Don't know? Look to your own theories! Remember, Adam and Eve never existed. All life started as single cell micro-organisms swimming about in the oceans. And somehow *those* evolved into people, right? Neanderthals, too.

And so why *couldn't* an E.coli virus evolve into a human? Who's to say that, a million bajillion years from now or however long you want to pretend the earth is old, E.coli doesn't itself evolve into a person? Particularly if that E.coli had at some point in its generational evolution infected a human -- because then there would be humanistic DNA in its DNA, which could cause mutations that would bring more human genes to the forefront. From the E.coli would begin to emerge some new form of human, an E.human, and like modern humans did with the Neanderthals, perhaps these new E.humans will push "regular" humans into obsolescence and oblivion. And perhaps it would only be by pairing our current human DNA with Neanderthal DNA -- by merging our strength with the strength of our ancestors -- that we might ourselves evolve a race of Neandohumans who could stand up to the E.humans and preserve our race.

Still laughing, subby? I'm sure as hell not.

Are there really people out there who believe humans evolved from apes?

Also, i see scientific validity in cloning a neanderthal. Studying their sexual behavior would be the most valid reason.

Here's the thing, evolutionistas. Either you accept evolution, or you don't, mmmkay? If you accept evolution, then you accept that all cells are constantly in a state of flux, as it were, evolving into some future evolution along the evolutionary ladder. Or slope, as it were. Very slippery slope. After all, it's a popular notion that "humans evolved from apes." But from where did those apes evolve, hm? Don't know? Look to your own theories! Remember, Adam and Eve never existed. All life started as single cell micro-organisms swimming about in the oceans. And somehow *those* evolved into people, right? Neanderthals, too.

And so why *couldn't* an E.coli virus evolve into a human? Who's to say that, a million bajillion years from now or however long you want to pretend the earth is old, E.coli doesn't itself evolve into a person? Particularly if that E.coli had at some point in its generational evolution infected a human -- because then there would be humanistic DNA in its DNA, which could cause mutations that would bring more human genes to the forefront. From the E.coli would begin to emerge some new form of human, an E.human, and like modern humans did with the Neanderthals, perhaps these new E.humans will push "regular" humans into obsolescence and oblivion. And perhaps it would only be by pairing our current human DNA with Neanderthal DNA -- by merging our strength with the strength of our ancestors -- that we might ourselves evolve a race of Neandohumans who could stand up to the E.humans and preserve our race.

Still laughing, subby? I'm sure as hell not.

I don't think you get how viruses work. Nice science fiction novel concept though

I think it would be cruel to raise a living Neanderthal in modern society. He/she would have rights, but perhaps not the wherewithal to use them. Raising a human to live an institutional life just to see how it would behave? That just seems barbaric.

Pocket Ninja:From the E.coli would begin to emerge some new form of human, an E.human, and like modern humans did with the Neanderthals, perhaps these new E.humans will push "regular" humans into obsolescence and oblivion.

There's no maybe about it. Ever hear of genetic memory? These E.humans sure as hell would have. They'd remember to kill people sure as their ancient single-celled ancestors used to. It's the same way all humans have a strange desire to kill and punish lizards and other reptiles. It's because we remember the dinosaurs that used to eat us alive. These things get passed down.

I think it would be cruel to raise a living Neanderthal in modern society. He/she would have rights, but perhaps not the wherewithal to use them. Raising a human to live an institutional life just to see how it would behave? That just seems barbaric.

We all know how PN works. We just got jarred out of the story by calling e. Coli a virus. He is usually much more subtle in crafting his story. We all enjoy the big finish he has in store for us. Probably hung over from a thirsty thursday...

Here's the thing, evolutionistas. Either you accept evolution, or you don't, mmmkay? If you accept evolution, then you accept that all cells are constantly in a state of flux, as it were, evolving into some future evolution along the evolutionary ladder. Or slope, as it were. Very slippery slope. After all, it's a popular notion that "humans evolved from apes." But from where did those apes evolve, hm? Don't know? Look to your own theories! Remember, Adam and Eve never existed. All life started as single cell micro-organisms swimming about in the oceans. And somehow *those* evolved into people, right? Neanderthals, too.

And so why *couldn't* an E.coli virus evolve into a human? Who's to say that, a million bajillion years from now or however long you want to pretend the earth is old, E.coli doesn't itself evolve into a person? Particularly if that E.coli had at some point in its generational evolution infected a human -- because then there would be humanistic DNA in its DNA, which could cause mutations that would bring more human genes to the forefront. From the E.coli would begin to emerge some new form of human, an E.human, and like modern humans did with the Neanderthals, perhaps these new E.humans will push "regular" humans into obsolescence and oblivion. And perhaps it would only be by pairing our current human DNA with Neanderthal DNA -- by merging our strength with the strength of our ancestors -- that we might ourselves evolve a race of Neandohumans who could stand up to the E.humans and preserve our race.

Still laughing, subby? I'm sure as hell not.

I don't think you get how viruses work. Nice science fiction novel concept though

I don't think you get how Pocket Ninja works.

The trick is to not to fav certain Farkers. That way you get to experience the knee-jerk once in a while.

Pocket Ninja:Oh, look. The E.coli thing again. Ha ha ha, let's point and laugh at the silly conservative politician because he asked if some scientist's Frankenstonian experiments in evolving a race of super E.coli hadn't caused unexpected mutations. Ha ha ha, so funny.

Here's the thing, evolutionistas. Either you accept evolution, or you don't, mmmkay? If you accept evolution, then you accept that all cells are constantly in a state of flux, as it were, evolving into some future evolution along the evolutionary ladder. Or slope, as it were. Very slippery slope. After all, it's a popular notion that "humans evolved from apes." But from where did those apes evolve, hm? Don't know? Look to your own theories! Remember, Adam and Eve never existed. All life started as single cell micro-organisms swimming about in the oceans. And somehow *those* evolved into people, right? Neanderthals, too.

And so why *couldn't* an E.coli virus evolve into a human? Who's to say that, a million bajillion years from now or however long you want to pretend the earth is old, E.coli doesn't itself evolve into a person? Particularly if that E.coli had at some point in its generational evolution infected a human -- because then there would be humanistic DNA in its DNA, which could cause mutations that would bring more human genes to the forefront. From the E.coli would begin to emerge some new form of human, an E.human, and like modern humans did with the Neanderthals, perhaps these new E.humans will push "regular" humans into obsolescence and oblivion. And perhaps it would only be by pairing our current human DNA with Neanderthal DNA -- by merging our strength with the strength of our ancestors -- that we might ourselves evolve a race of Neandohumans who could stand up to the E.humans and preserve our race.

theorellior:madgonad: I am against this for different reasons than most.

I think it would be cruel to raise a living Neanderthal in modern society. He/she would have rights, but perhaps not the wherewithal to use them. Raising a human to live an institutional life just to see how it would behave? That just seems barbaric.

"The Ungly Little Boy" nods knowingly.

At least that was a child transported through time. Cloning a Neanderthal would have zero societal benefit from the extinct Neanderthal culture. It would literally be a lump of biological clay - with behavior more determined by limitation than what would have been 'normal'.

Or perhaps we would be totally surprised and the Neanderthal would grow up to be a Rhodes Scholar and write papers on chauvinism based upon species.

NutWrench:No, it's the assertion that humans "evolved from apes." That's demonstrably false. Humans and apes evolved from a common ancestor.

[pedantic] Humans are apes. We are Old World primates with no tails. The term "ape" is a superfamily designation, not a species. Other ape species include gorillas, chimps, gibbons and orangutans. All of these species evolved from a common ancestor, but we're all still apes. [/pedantic]

Pocket Ninja:Oh, look. The E.coli thing again. Ha ha ha, let's point and laugh at the silly conservative politician because he asked if some scientist's Frankenstonian experiments in evolving a race of super E.coli hadn't caused unexpected mutations. Ha ha ha, so funny.

Here's the thing, evolutionistas. Either you accept evolution, or you don't, mmmkay? If you accept evolution, then you accept that all cells are constantly in a state of flux, as it were, evolving into some future evolution along the evolutionary ladder. Or slope, as it were. Very slippery slope. After all, it's a popular notion that "humans evolved from apes." But from where did those apes evolve, hm? Don't know? Look to your own theories! Remember, Adam and Eve never existed. All life started as single cell micro-organisms swimming about in the oceans. And somehow *those* evolved into people, right? Neanderthals, too.

And so why *couldn't* an E.coli virus evolve into a human? Who's to say that, a million bajillion years from now or however long you want to pretend the earth is old, E.coli doesn't itself evolve into a person? Particularly if that E.coli had at some point in its generational evolution infected a human -- because then there would be humanistic DNA in its DNA, which could cause mutations that would bring more human genes to the forefront. From the E.coli would begin to emerge some new form of human, an E.human, and like modern humans did with the Neanderthals, perhaps these new E.humans will push "regular" humans into obsolescence and oblivion. And perhaps it would only be by pairing our current human DNA with Neanderthal DNA -- by merging our strength with the strength of our ancestors -- that we might ourselves evolve a race of Neandohumans who could stand up to the E.humans and preserve our race.

Actually, I think a Neanderthal would perform fairly well in our society. Evidence suggests that they're faster, stronger, and just as intelligent (If not moreso) as modern humans. It's been awhile, but I remember one of my biology professors talking about our distinct advantage being a longer development time, which forced community-building and education.

However, imagine being the only thing in the world that doesn't have single peer. That could bring some terrible psychological ailments.

I just so love it when some hack "journalist" acts as if science fiction scenarios could ever actually happen IRL.

In the very least they should change up the scenarios once in a while, like someone should argue that we should just accept the occupation from the hyper-evolved fascists from the future with an old school but snappy fashion sense.

No, it's the assertion that humans "evolved from apes." That's demonstrably false. Humans and apes evolved from a common ancestor.

So conservatives would attempt to disprove evolution by stating that humans evolved from apes? I'm not getting the strawman here

The strawman is that the creationists imply that humans evolved from one of the living, modern species of apes. We did not. Chimpanzees, bonobos, gorillas, orangutans, gibbons, and siamangs are all apes, and so are humans. We have increasingly distant "cousin" relationships with them, but none of them are the ancestors of any of the others.

If you re-phrase the question in more familiar terms, the flaw is more obvious. "Your cousin is your grandfather" is clearly a false statement (for most of us, at least), but your cousin and you both descend from a shared ancestor- that ancestor was neither you nor your cousin, but your mutual grandparent.

If you remove the false implication that the living, extant species of apes are the only ones, and instead include the extinct species of apes, then humans did in fact evolve from "apes," just not any of the modern ones. We descend from several species of apes that are now extinct.

So the strawman comes from the implicit limitation of the category "apes" to "modern apes." Remove that limitation and the statement is accurate.

Pocket Ninja:Oh, look. The E.coli thing again. Ha ha ha, let's point and laugh at the silly conservative politician because he asked if some scientist's Frankenstonian experiments in evolving a race of super E.coli hadn't caused unexpected mutations. Ha ha ha, so funny.

Here's the thing, evolutionistas. Either you accept evolution, or you don't, mmmkay? If you accept evolution, then you accept that all cells are constantly in a state of flux, as it were, evolving into some future evolution along the evolutionary ladder. Or slope, as it were. Very slippery slope. After all, it's a popular notion that "humans evolved from apes." But from where did those apes evolve, hm? Don't know? Look to your own theories! Remember, Adam and Eve never existed. All life started as single cell micro-organisms swimming about in the oceans. And somehow *those* evolved into people, right? Neanderthals, too.

And so why *couldn't* an E.coli virus evolve into a human? Who's to say that, a million bajillion years from now or however long you want to pretend the earth is old, E.coli doesn't itself evolve into a person? Particularly if that E.coli had at some point in its generational evolution infected a human -- because then there would be humanistic DNA in its DNA, which could cause mutations that would bring more human genes to the forefront. From the E.coli would begin to emerge some new form of human, an E.human, and like modern humans did with the Neanderthals, perhaps these new E.humans will push "regular" humans into obsolescence and oblivion. And perhaps it would only be by pairing our current human DNA with Neanderthal DNA -- by merging our strength with the strength of our ancestors -- that we might ourselves evolve a race of Neandohumans who could stand up to the E.humans and preserve our race.

Still laughing, subby? I'm sure as hell not.

I definitely am! Started off a bit slow, but the dénouement was brilliant.

theorellior:NutWrench: No, it's the assertion that humans "evolved from apes." That's demonstrably false. Humans and apes evolved from a common ancestor.

[pedantic] Humans are apes. We are Old World primates with no tails. The term "ape" is a superfamily designation, not a species. Other ape species include gorillas, chimps, gibbons and orangutans. All of these species evolved from a common ancestor, but we're all still apes. [/pedantic]

Coolfusis:Actually, I think a Neanderthal would perform fairly well in our society. Evidence suggests that they're faster, stronger, and just as intelligent (If not moreso) as modern humans. It's been awhile, but I remember one of my biology professors talking about our distinct advantage being a longer development time, which forced community-building and education.

The strawman is that the creationists imply that humans evolved from one of the living, modern species of apes. .

I see, thank you. As a conservative, it often amuses me to see what generalizations liberals like to apply to conservatives. Thank you for making the distinction between creationists and conservatives, since my desire for smaller government, lower taxes, and strong foreign policy are completely separate from my belief that my great great grandfather was a modern orangutan